4 ms·
Right. And even if you only work in “safe rust”, a massive part of the software stack you rely on still isn’t formally verified like that. LLVM and rustc aren’t
by josephg 3y ago
Right. And even if you only work in “safe rust”, a massive part of the software stack you rely on still isn’t formally verified like that. LLVM and rustc aren’t formally verified - and they likely have bugs. The kernel is all “unsafe” code. And the rust standard library is full of unsafe code. And so on. Moving heaven and earth to excise the last 2% of unsafe code in random rust libraries just doesn’t make engineering sense. Especially when doing so comes with a significant performance cost.
If reliability is what you’re after, that time is almost certainly better spent adding more tests, fuzz testing and validating your code with Miri and friends.